Search

Objective: This study investigated the relationship between work-related factors at baseline and the risk of common mental disorder at 12 month follow-up among a cohort of junior doctors. Method: The data comprised the junior doctor respondents from two annual waves of the 'Medicine in Australia: Balancing Employment and Life' (MABEL) survey, a national longitudinal cohort of Australian doctors. Individual and work-related risk factors were assessed at baseline and the mental health outcome of caseness of common mental disorder (CMD) was assessed using the 6-item Kessler Psychological Distress Scale at 12-month follow-up. Unadjusted and adjusted logistic regressions were conducted to estimate the association between each baseline variable and the likelihood of CMD caseness at follow-up 1 year later. Results: Among 383 junior doctors, 24 (6%) had CMD 1 year later. Five work-related baseline variables were significantly associated with a higher likelihood of CMD 1 year later in adjusted models; lack of social support in work location (odds ratios (OR) = 6.11; 95% confidence intervals (CI) = [2.52, 14.81]), work-life imbalance (OR = 4.50; 95% CI = [1.31, 15.46]), poor peer support network in the workplace (OR = 2.61; 95% CI = [1.08, 6.27]), perceptions of patient expectations (OR = 2.46; 95% CI = [1.06, 5.71]) and total weekly work hours (OR 1.04; 95% CI = [1.01, 1.07]; p = 0.002)in models adjusting for gender. Conclusion: These results identify key modifiable work-related factors that are associated with junior doctors' future mental health. Our findings suggest the need for a greater focus upon interpersonal factors and work-life balance in multi-level interventions while continuing to address workplace and system-level factors to prevent future mental disorder in junior doctors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Accredited Persons Programme was introduced in 2003. The relevant Mental Health Acts (NSW) authorised reviews by appropriately credentialed non-medical health professionals as part of the process of detaining and treating a person without consent: an authority previously held by medical officers. Evaluations of the Programme are needed. Objective: To compare discharge decisions for hospital-treated deliberate self-poisoning patients made by an Accredited Person and Medical Officers. Methods: For a 10-year cohort (2003–2012) of index hospital-treated deliberate self-poisoning admissions at the Calvary Mater Newcastle, we compared Accredited Person and Medical Officer discharge decisions from the general hospital. We specifically examined discharges to the psychiatric hospital under a Mental Health Act certificate (used as an index of the Accredited Person's use of the authority under the Accredited Persons Programme) compared to any other discharge destination. Unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models and a propensity score analysis were used to explore the relationship between clinician type and discharge destination. Results: There were 2237 index assessments (Accredited Person = 884; Medical Officer = 1443). One-quarter (27%) were referred for assessment under the Act at the psychiatric hospital, with the Accredited Person significantly more likely (32%) to require this compared to the Medical Officers (24%); Risk Difference: 8.3% (4.5 to 12.1). However, after adjusting for patient characteristics; Risk Difference: −3.0% (−5.9 to −0.1) and for propensity score, Risk Difference: −3.3% (−6.7 to 0.1), the Accredited Person and Medical Officer likelihood of discharging for an assessment under the Act was similar. Conclusions: The Accredited Person assessed more clinically complex patients than the Medical Officers. After adjusting for clinical complexity and propensity score, the likelihood of referral for involuntary psychiatric hospital care was similar for Accredited Person and Medical Officers. Our evaluation of the Accredited Person programme in the general hospital was favourable, and wider implementation and evaluation is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study assessed the extent to which local reporting of Robin Williams' suicide (on 11 August 2014) was associated with suicide in Australia. It followed several studies in the United States which showed that there were significant increases in suicide following media reports of Williams' death and that those media reports were less than optimal in terms of adherence to best-practice guidelines. In a previous study, we demonstrated that Australian media reports of Williams' suicide were largely adherent with our Mindframe guidelines on responsible reporting of suicide, so we speculated that there would be no increase in suicide following the reporting of Williams' suicide in Australia. Method: We extracted data on Australian suicides from the National Coroners Information System for the period 2001 to 2016. We conducted interrupted time series regression analyses to determine whether there were changes in suicides in the 5-month period immediately following Williams' suicide. Results: Our hypothesis that there would be no increase in suicides in Australia following Williams' highly publicised suicide was not supported. There was an 11% increase in suicides in the 5-month period following Williams' death, largely accounted for by men aged 30–64 and by people who died by hanging (the method Williams used). Conclusion: It may be that Australians were exposed to reports that contravened safe reporting recommendations, particularly via overseas media or social media, and/or that some Australian reports may have had unhelpful overarching narratives, despite largely adhering to the Mindframe guidelines. The Mindframe guidelines constitute international best practice but consideration should be given to whether certain recommendations within them should be further reinforced and whether more nuanced information about how stories should be framed could be provided. Future revision and augmentation of the Mindframe guidelines should, as always, involve media professionals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Victoria, Australia, introduced reformed mental health legislation in 2014. The Act was based on a policy platform of recovery-oriented services, supported decision-making and minimisation of the use and duration of compulsory orders. This paper compares service utilisation and legal status after being on a community treatment order under the Mental Health Act 1986 (Vic) with that under the Mental Health Act 2014 (Vic). Methods: We obtained two distinct data sets of persons who had been on a community treatment order for at least 3 months and their subsequent treatment episodes over 2 years under the Mental Health Act and/or as an inpatient for the periods 2008–2010 (Mental Health Act 1986) and 2014–2016 (Mental Health Act 2014). The two sets were compared to assess the difference in use, duration and odds of having a further admission over 2 years. We also considered the mode of discharge – whether by the treating psychiatrist, external body or through expiry. Results: Compared with the Mental Health Act 1986, under the Mental Health Act 2014, index community treatment orders were shorter (mean 227 days compared with 335 days); there was a reduction in the mean number of community treatment orders in the 2 years following the index discharge − 1.1 compared with 1.5 (incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 0.71, 95% confidence interval = [0.63, 0.80]) – and a 51% reduction in days on an order over 2 years. There was a reduction in the number of subsequent orders for those whose order expired or was revoked by the psychiatrist under the Mental Health Act 2014 compared to those under the Mental Health Act 1986. The number of orders which were varied to an inpatient order by the authorised psychiatrist was notably greater under the Mental Health Act 2014. Conclusion: The reformed Mental Health Act has been successful in its intent to reduce the use and duration of compulsory orders in the community. The apparent increase in return to inpatient orders raises questions regarding the intensity and effectiveness of community treatment and context of service delivery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Presentation to hospital after self-harm is an opportunity to treat underlying mental health problems. We aimed to describe the pattern of mental health contacts following hospital admission focusing on those with and without recent contact with community mental health services (connected and unconnected patients). Methods: We undertook a data linkage study of all individuals admitted as a general or psychiatric inpatient to hospital after self-harm in New South Wales, Australia, between 2005 and 2011. We identified the proportion of admissions where the patient received subsequent in-person community mental health care within 30 days of discharge and the factors associated with receipt of that care. Results: A total of 42,353 individuals were admitted to hospital for self-harm. In 41% of admissions, the patient had contact with a community mental health service after discharge. Patients connected with community mental health services had 5.33 (95% confidence interval = [5.09, 5.59]) times higher odds of follow-up care than unconnected patients. Other factors, such as increasing age and treatment as a psychiatric inpatient, were associated with lower odds of follow-up community care. Conclusion: Our study suggests that full advantage is not being taken of the opportunity to provide comprehensive mental health care for people who self-harm once they have been discharged from the inpatient setting. This is particularly the case for those who have not previously received community mental health care. There appears to be scope for system-level improvement in the way in which those who are treated for self-harm are followed up in the community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Prisoners are at increased risk of both self-harm and suicide compared with the general population, and the risk of suicide after release from prison is three times greater than for those still incarcerated. However, surprisingly little is known about the incidence of self-harm following release from prison. We aimed to determine the incidence of, identify risk factors for and characterise emergency department presentations resulting from self-harm in adults after release from prison. Method: Cohort study of 1325 adults interviewed prior to release from prison, linked prospectively with State correctional and emergency department records. Data from all emergency department presentations resulting from self-harm were secondarily coded to characterise these presentations. We used negative binomial regression to identify independent predictors of such presentations. Results: During 3192 person-years of follow-up (median 2.6 years per participant), there were 3755 emergency department presentations. In all, 83 (6.4%) participants presented due to self-harm, accounting for 165 (4.4%) presentations. The crude incidence rates of self-harm for males and females were 49.2 (95% confidence interval: [41.2, 58.7]) and 60.5 (95% confidence interval: [44.9, 81.6]) per 1000 person-years, respectively. Presenting due to self-harm was associated with being Indigenous (incidence rate ratio: 2.01; 95% confidence interval: [1.11, 3.62]), having a lifetime history of a mental disorder (incidence rate ratio: 2.13; 95% confidence interval: [1.19, 3.82]), having previously been hospitalised for psychiatric treatment (incidence rate ratio: 2.68; 95% confidence interval: [1.40, 5.14]) and having previously presented due to self-harm (incidence rate ratio: 3.91; 95% confidence interval: [1.85, 8.30]). Conclusion: Following release from prison, one in 15 ex-prisoners presented to an emergency department due to self-harm, within an average of 2.6 years of release. Demographic and mental health variables help to identify at-risk groups, and such presentations could provide opportunities for suicide prevention in this population. Transition from prison to the community is challenging, particularly for those with a history of mental disorder; mental health support during and after release may reduce the risk of adverse outcomes, including self-harm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Little work has examined Community Treatment Order processes, including mode of termination. This paper aimed to examine service utilisation and legal status following the Community Treatment Order termination by a review board, treating psychiatrist or expiry of order. Method: Data-linkage study following the service utilisation of those discharged from a Community Treatment Order of at least 3-month duration for the subsequent 2 years. We used the state-wide database of all contacts with state-funded mental health services in Victoria, Australia. Results: Of the 1478 patients who were discharged, 5% were discharged by the review board, 88% were discharged by the treating psychiatrist and in 7% the order expired. Logistic regression indicated that those discharged by the treating service were less likely to be subsequently placed under an involuntary order than those discharged by the Mental Health Review Board or those whose order had expired (odds ratio = 0.61). Conclusion: Poorly planned discharge as a result of expiry of the Community Treatment Order or abrupt discharge by the review board may be associated with a more severe relapse and subsequent need for compulsory treatment. The likelihood of being readmitted as an involuntary patient is greater for younger adults and those living in urban settings. In order to minimise the risk of major relapse, strong community engagement with treating services should be supported. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a study as of January 2015 that described frequent callers to Lifeline, a crisis helpline in Australia. The study compared these callers with non-frequent callers to further knowledge about models of service delivery. It reveals predictors of being a frequent caller including being male or transgender and never having been married while suicidality, self-harm, and mental health issues as predictors of frequent callers age 55-64.